Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:

Password

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:

Confirm Password:

Email Address

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:

OR

Log-in

User Name

Password

Remember Me?

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

Additional Options

Miscellaneous Options

Automatically parse links in text

Automatically embed media (requires automatic parsing of links in text to be on).

Actually this leads into another theory of mine, the extra wide (24+") stances that some guys ride with now actually hurt their park performance. The bindings, boots, and your lower legs are that much further apart making it take more energy to spin at the same spin speed.

gotta disagree... wider stance allows more force to be put into the rotation, and if you need to spin faster you can orient your board, while in the air, closer to your spin axis, rocket / mute / tail grabs

02-24-2013 02:42 PM

snowklinger

Not to mention you can add not only weight loss and gain but also strength gain (and loss). Just a little stronger noodle arms will make that board and bindings seems less heavy.

I'm about 15 pounds heavier this year than when I finished last year (beer addiction!)... If I were to add 15 pounds to my board/boots/bindings I think it'd be almost unrideable!

Same here. Not the beer addiction, it's actually take-out on account of never having enough desire to grocery shop after snowboarding all day.

2 season's ago I would flux between 175-180. I'm up to 187 now and I can def feel it affecting my snowboarding. I think the 1lb. difference in a set up is insignificant compared to being 5-10lbs. heavier weight-wise.

Nope. The difference between different boards and bindings (boots less so) is so small that it is pretty much negligible for travel weight - that is much more driven how much other gear you bring or even the weight of the (empty) luggage itself.

Check this thread: Out of almost 20 users, only 1 had a board-binding combo that did not fall in the 10-12lbs bracket.

Thanks hktrdr for the tread link. sorry what i was meaning was the weight of all the equipment including outerwear, googles, helmet, etc... just to me i consider all that equipment. After travelling for work and paying $500 in excess (long story) i've learnt every kilo counts

Yeah I think I remember replying to that thread! I think every board/binding combo I've weighed so far has fallen between that 10-12 pound mark. That's everything from a 1995 Kemper Freestyle 153, to a 149 K2 womens board, to a 160 cm "Fucking Light Project" with Diode bindings...

Yup, indeed. A couple of my set-ups just scrape in below 10lbs (say, a 155 Cobra with Union Metafuses comes in somewhere around 9.5lbs - with a pair of Burton bindings it is just above 10lbs), but it makes fuck all of a difference.

Check this thread: Out of almost 20 users, only 1 had a board-binding combo that did not fall in the 10-12lbs bracket.

Yeah I think I remember replying to that thread! I think every board/binding combo I've weighed so far has fallen between that 10-12 pound mark. That's everything from a 1995 Kemper Freestyle 153, to a 149 K2 womens board, to a 160 cm "Fucking Light Project" with Diode bindings...

also the weight of the equipment is also a BIG factor in travelling, unless you like paying excess baggage fees

Nope. The difference between different boards and bindings (boots less so) is so small that it is pretty much negligible for travel weight - that is much more driven how much other gear you bring or even the weight of the (empty) luggage itself.

Check this thread: Out of almost 20 users, only 1 had a board-binding combo that did not fall in the 10-12lbs bracket.

Not to open up the debate again, but comparing gear weight to weight you carry, or your suit, is apples to oranges. Anybody here ever heard of unsprung weight in a car? It's the rims, tires, brakes, hubs, and portions of the strut. If you can shave a couple pounds of unsprung weight off a car it'll make a real difference in lap times.

So for us, boards, boots and bindings are the unsprung weight at the end of our springs (legs). You will feel a pound or two under your feet that you wouldn't feel if you carried it in your pockets.

when i started reading this this thread, that was exactly my first thought. my own opinion weight is a factor that should be in most of snowboarding specs. for example if you jump with normal shoes, you would wear out slower, jump higher and with more snap compare to jumping with 5kg lead shoes as it requires move force to move. if you move that 5kg to your backpack, yes it would affect the you jump but you will still get your legs up higher and quicker. i'm trying to say being light is the best thing either, you need the weight gain speed down a slope, the inertia to get you further in a jump. in the end it comes down to weight management and basic newtons law of motion :P

also the weight of the equipment is also a BIG factor in travelling, unless you like paying excess baggage fees

02-23-2013 08:58 PM

aiidoneus

The one area I see weight really matters is back country. If you are spending a day, or even doing some winter camping. Weight matters, you have so much gear, food, water.

I don't have a split board yet. So I have my snowshoes on, and carry my board on my pack. I wish it was lighter

Going to the next discipline, if you're in the park doing spin tricks, weight on your body would be close to the centre of gravity, while weight in your board/bindings/boots would be much further out. Watch a figure skater spin, and when they pull their arms in (i.e. all the weight coming towards the centre) they actually accelerate without putting any more energy into the spin itself. This is why even identical model boards will be much easier to spin if one's shorter, all the additional weight is out at the tips.

Totally agree with that - but, as you said it is a completely different point. And you are slightly incorrect that it is about the center of gravity - what matters is the axis of rotation.
The ankle weights will make spinning much more difficult, because they are further away from the axis of rotation which (unless you are doing inverts or corks) generally is line with your spine. The vertical positioning (board level, chest level) does not really matter.
To make the suggested experiment with the weights relevant, the weights would have to be either i) moved in from the ankles, closer to the center of the board (roughly in hip width) or ii) further out from the hoodie pockets or backpack. I contend that if you did that the vertical positioning of the weights (board level vs. chest level) would not affect spin performance.

Actually this leads into another theory of mine, the extra wide (24+") stances that some guys ride with now actually hurt their park performance. The bindings, boots, and your lower legs are that much further apart making it take more energy to spin at the same spin speed.

Completely agree with David's response to this - it is pretty much accepted that a very wide stance reduces the ability to spin and pivot the board.

This thread has more than 10 replies.
Click here to review the whole thread.